And what instrumentation will be needed to make that determination?
Since you brought up biological vectors, what are the biological half lives of those isotopes in those vectors?
LOL.
When the big rocket makes fire out of the bottom, it pushes the spacepeople in their astronout suits far up into the sky, until they get to space.
Is that wrong? Do I need to know the exact molecular weights of the fuel combinations involved, or the thrust vectoring and rotation required for orbital insertion?
Likewise, are you arguing that concentration vectors don't exist? That there's no scientific way to determine discrimination isotopes that would indicate source? That biological half-lives are not known by those who study the relevant sciences?
Because it seems you're now admitting that such issues CAN be of value in studying this matter, and ARE important to this subject, and SHOULD be determined by competent scientists. But you're not admitting that - oh no. Instead, you're trying to baffle with bullshit, scream by the fact that you got pwned and claim a win because you can ask pseudo-scientific questions of hyper-detail and distract from the fact that you are admitting the value of the concerns that have been raised.
Yes, pseudo-science. Your questions are a grab-bag of related concepts that are answered by merely looking up technical details, without any discussion of why such details are necessary.
Because THAT would require ADMITTING they are necessary.
Genius.
I assure you that sealife off the coast of Japan is heavily scrutinized. Because it is relevant near the source.
If you had any sense of dilution factors, you would understand that ut simply isn’t worth the expense to monitor west coast sealife radiation.
Get back to me when you learn of any Instances of elevated strontium or cobalt in fish smuggled in from Japan to the west coast fish markets. Because thats the only evidence that your silly biological vector theory will have any validity